Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a dropped kerb because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s rejection of her application for a dropped kerb. She wants a crossover so she can charge an electric car and says there should be an appeals process. Mrs X also says most of the properties in her area have a dropped kerb and there is pressure on parking in her street.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mrs X. I also considered the Council’s dropped kerb policy and our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The dropped kerb policy says the Council assesses applications against the current policy and existing dropped kerbs do not necessarily mean a new application will be approved. The policy says the Council will refuse an application if a crossover would involve the loss of more that two metres of grass verge.
6. The policy says the decision is final but people can complain if there has been an error in the application of the policy.
7. Mrs X applied for a dropped kerb. The Council rejected the application because it would involve the loss of 2.45 metres of grass verge.
8. Mrs X does not dispute the figures but tried to appeal. The Council said the decision was final but she could complain.
9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. This is because the Council’s decision to reject the application reflects the policy and there is nothing to suggest fault in the way it applied the policy. Mrs X may disagree with the policy but that is not an indication of fault, and we cannot change Council policy.
10. The decision not to allow an appeal also reflects the policy and an appeal would not lead to a different outcome because the application breaches the requirement in terms of the loss of grass verge. Mrs X has explained why she would like a dropped kerb but there is no provision in the policy for exceptions linked to charging points. Mrs X could contact her local councillors if she thinks the policy should be changed to allow for the installation of dropped kerbs to facilitate charging points.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman